Rove Indictment Likely Sealed
For those of you unable to hit Truthout due to exessive traffic, here are some excerpts from the followup story on the Rove indictment.
This analysis from a diarist at Kos.
“Marc Ash updated the Rove story today at Truthout speculating that Rove might be turning state’s evidence. He talks about the pressure TruthOut has come under to back off the story (he’s not talking about critique from bloggers), and the fact that they have three independent sources confirming the indictment.”
Marc Ash:
“We know that we have now three independent sources confirming that attorneys for Karl Rove were handed an indictment either late in the night of May 12 or early in the morning of May 13. We know that each source was in a position to know what they were talking about. We know that the office of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald will not confirm, will not deny, will not comment on its investigation or on our report. We know that both Rove’s attorney Robert Luskin and Rove’s spokesman Mark Corallo have categorically denied all key facts we have set forth. We know we have information that directly contradicts Luskin and Corallo’s denials. We know that there were two network news crews outside of the building in Washington, DC that houses the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm that represents Karl Rove. We know that the 4th floor of that building (where the Patton Boggs offices are located) was locked down all day Friday and into Saturday night. We know that we have not received a request for a retraction from anyone. And we know that White House spokesman Tony Snow now refuses to discuss Karl Rove - at all.”
May 22nd, 2006 at 3:36 pm
Sounds like Truthout knows everything there is to possibly know; excepting, however, whether Karl Rove has in fact been indicted.
May 22nd, 2006 at 9:20 pm
I personally take no pleasure, absolutely none, in this man’s pain. He has always been personally kind to me. At the White House, where I was hurting badly, from heart attacks and cancer and a home burning down, Karl Rove, and President and Mrs. Bush, were very kind. Karl reassurred me that the White House doctor was at my disposal. Night and day. He wrote me last week, a kindly friendly letter. All I know is this: when I was sick he took me in. When I was nearly in the hospital, he visited me. He took my calls, actually cuddled me in my pain. I don’t give a shit, personally, about philosophical truth. j I care about the real thing, incarnate. Karl Rove is and remains my friend. In this time of his pain, I take no joy. He remains my friend. I if I could do it, I would help him, in a minute. And he’s proven, to me, that he did and would again, if I needed him, assist me. I am proud to call him friend. If in this time of need I could be of help, I stand ready. To me personally, he has extended himself in every way. Up to and including a letter I received a day or two ago. Ed Firmage
May 22nd, 2006 at 9:36 pm
I’m trying, again, to leave a message on they top-billed story on Karl Rove being indicted. For some reason, once I wrote a response, a message appeared saying, in effect, I’d already left that same respnonse. This is not so. I don’t really know how the electronics of this thing work. But my message, again, is simply this: While I was at the White House recently, Karl Rove, President Bush, and Mrs. Bush were all personally very kind to me, Karl in particular. He knew of my house fire and my cancer, and was concerned about my heart attacks. He privately, i.e., with obviously no benefit to himself, offered the services of the White House physician, told me to call night or day to him personally for anything I needed, and took my calls and helped me in and through a very difficult time. All I know about Shalom, about Christianity, about real bona fide shalom to others, is this: when I was in need, he was there. He took me in, and ministered to me. I take no joy in his pain. He wrote me, personally, in this time of great trauma, again to say “we are and remain friends.” He is a fellow human being, under great stress. Still, in this setting, he took time to pen a letter to me, expressing his continued friendship. This is all I know of ethics. I don’t care much for friendship in the abstract, whatever the hell that means. I just know he was there for me in a time of great pesonal pain, dislocation, trauma. If I can be of help to Karl Rove, now or in the future, I stand readly. He’s already proven his friendship to me. This is NOT a repeat of anything I’ve ever said, in public or private. Ed Firmage
May 23rd, 2006 at 1:07 pm
Ed, while I honor your loyalty as a friend of Rove, I question at what point your principles are subordinated by that loyalty.
Karl Rove has overseen what can only be described a criminal and corrupt administration. Even if he technically broke no laws, isn’t a man required to exercise conscience over authority?
If nothing else, Karl orchestrated the partisanship, divisiveness, and fear mongering that has so distorted out social conscience at so many levels.
Did he ask your forgiveness? And how can you be sure he actually gives a shit about you?
He’s well proven to be an unrepentant destroyer of character placing politics over nation and authority over the Constitution.
May 23rd, 2006 at 6:36 pm
Hi friend,
I didn’t vote for Bush, the first or second time around. I obviously do not approve of this war of aggression, the violation of our Bill Of Rights, or any of the crimes and misdemeanors of this administration. But I don’t want to practice the demonization of politics that I see, today, as a real sickness. See my quotes of Primo Levi, in my talk of Capitol Hill, and its publication in Let My children Go. I fear the demonization of politics. I fear, in Levi’s words, the Lager. Take a read in the essay Why Did the Watchdogs Never Bark, in the 2005 book on church and state, published by Signature Books, with my chapter, quoting Auden, the great poet of WW !!. Ed Firmage